Assassin’s Creed Valhalla: The Siege of Paris Review

Freerunning through Paris during the siege.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla Siege of Paris Review: Everything is the same

"Assassin & # 39; s Creed Valhalla & # 39; s Siege of Paris DLC is the same game, a different setting – nothing new to see here."

advantages

  • History has thematic weight

  • Assassination missions are returning

disadvantage

  • An inconspicuous world

  • Grid sign

  • Severe lack of unique content

For me, the Assassin's Creed franchise is about wandering historical areas, talking to the icons of the time, and sometimes murdering them. In Odyssey, players venture through the colorful world of ancient Greece, meet brilliant mathematicians and philosophers, and explore ruins that still stand today.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla drops the ball in that regard. His world is usually beautiful, but hardly filled with recognizable characters and set pieces. Valhalla's basic gameplay loop doesn't do much to compensate for this issue either, and stagnates after the first couple of iterations. However, the game's Siege of Paris expansion takes in and amplifies any current issues, resulting in a prime example of how bloat, repetition, and general boredom can ruin an expansion.

Beg for compassion

The Siege of Paris DLC begins with two new characters arriving in Ravensthorpe warning Eivor of a mad Franconian king who could one day sail to the coast of England and destroy what they have built. Given the potential threat, Eivor decides to sail to Paris to convince the mad King Charles the Fat to leave England alone one way or another.

From the first time you set foot in Paris, things are obviously different in Walhalla. The picturesque land is bloodied and burned as Charles ’troops destroy everything Nordic on their way. In these opening moments, Paris is neither colorful nor beautiful. It's dead, and it's a fitting introduction as players delve into the story of the Expansion's Revenge and how religion can distort people's minds.

This promising story, however, is told by some of the most unredeemable, poorly-written characters I've come across in an Assassin's Creed title. Charles himself is a madman who is hard to forgive by the end of the DLC, regardless of your point of view. Of course, his wife (a good Christian whom he tries to kill several times) is an apologist who believes he can be saved, and the game eventually tries to push players in that direction too.

Charlemagne in the siege of Paris.

Likewise, the Viking leader Sigfred, who leads the siege of Paris, is an angry lunatic, which shouldn't sound too strange to a Nord invader. In fact, Sigfred is one of the easier characters to sympathize with early on. This is all taken away after he (and I cannot stress this enough) commits war crimes during the siege of Paris. There's a reason some of the more brutal aspects of Viking life – the rampant murders and looting – are left out of the game's main story. Assassin's Creed Valhalla has a strong stance on what is right and wrong, even with Vikings as the main characters, and Sigfred falls heavily on the wrong side.

There are no characters to bond with, no one to miss when the credits roll in after about eight hours.

Of course, there are some entertaining characters in The Siege of Paris, but they can't save the game's overall poor cast. There are no characters to bond with, no one to miss when the credits roll after about eight hours. Having villains or anti-heroes in a story is never a bad thing, but they need to be made convincing or at least reasonably relatable, and Siege of Paris doesn't do either.

More of the same

Between the main story missions, players can explore Paris and its outskirts as well as England, Vinland or other areas of the game. Much of what The Siege of Paris has to offer both inside and outside the main story can be found throughout the base game. This is Valhalla's systemic problem, and it is a difficult one: the main game loop of the game repeats itself quickly and often with few variations. That remains true in The Siege of Paris.

The huge map of the expansion is still littered with collectibles, world events and wealth to crap your pockets with. There are even a few monasteries to loot, but none of this is new. The equality would have been somewhat offset if Paris had looked more prominent, but that's not the case. If you tell me it's any other part of England, or really any part of Central Europe, I would believe you.

That's not to say the area can't be beautiful. It is filled with lush nature, small towns and villages. Paris has its own charm but is losing its French accent and I couldn't tell the ninth century Paris, France, from Hamburg, Germany. It's just not distinctive; There are no landmarks or locations that players want to see quickly.

Freerunning through Paris during the siege.

Even the rest of the contents of the extension have this property. None of the missions, apart from the actual siege of Paris, are memorable. Again, this is the same content that players know from the main game. I followed NPCs, examined things by holding a button for a moment, and smacking enemies to a pulp.

It's just not distinctive; There are no sights to see or places to visit quickly.

Thankfully, there is some unique content in the Siege of Paris. Players will face off against cavalry, which is a decent threat, until they figure out how to fight it effectively. There are also rebel missions that players can take on at any time and earn new cosmetics. The DLC also marks the return of assassination missions that players may remember from previous games in the franchise. Players are tasked with taking out a specific target and exploring ways to murder their prey. However, these missions all steer the players towards an extremely obvious solution and leave behind the creativity of the players in their approach.

Our opinion

I've played a decent number of RPG expansions in my day, and most of them have built on what the base game does well. Whether it's Blood and Wine from The Witcher 3 or Old World Blues from New Vegas, a good DLC takes the best aspects of the base game and highlights them with a unique, new spin. Assassin's Creed Valhalla’s Siege of Paris opposes this. The best parts of the game – its world and characters – stay in the dirt while a boring gameplay loop and clumsy story take center stage. Of course, some players will enjoy exploring more of this, but considering how long it takes to quit Valhalla, I couldn't imagine coming back for seconds. When I first got to the version of the game from Paris, I saw an exhausted, burned-out country. When I left it, I could certainly empathize.

Is there a better alternative?

If you're looking for some extra Assassin & # 39; s Creed adventures, try Odyssey's The Fate of Atlantis DLC pack. It will take a while to finish, but it has a lot more unique content than you can find in The Siege of Paris.

How long it will take?

It took me about seven hours to complete the main story of The Siege of Paris. Completing the rest of the DLC content could easily eat up another 20 in my estimation.

Should you buy it?

No. When you're done Assassin's Creed Valhalla and not striving for more, there is no compelling reason to dive back in. The Siege of Paris doesn't offer enough unique content to entertain everyone but the most ardent Assassin & # 39; s Creed fans.

Editor's recommendations



Assassin’s Creed Valhalla Review: One of the Good Ones

Assassins Creed Valhalla Review Assassin s

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

"Valhalla combines the best fight on the show with a more organic world."

  • Breathtaking fight

  • Refined metasystems

  • A more thoughtful open world

  • Raiding never gets old

  • The expansion of your settlement is convincing

  • Familiar story

  • Buggy, especially on the PC

  • Stealth and modern content are missing

Assassin's Creed Valhalla is my personal favorite in this new, remastered trilogy of games in the franchise, but the reasons I enjoy it might be shutdowns for others. Improved combat and one-train raid is at the heart of the game, and while it's well executed, it ultimately throws aside the franchise's stealth roots.

This is a step the series needs to take. to break away from what defined these games nearly a decade ago to become the standard bearer for action RPG.

I want to get this out of the way too: if you were going to record this game on PC at startup, don't. Not to say that the console version can't be buggy at times, but the PC version was almost unplayable for me (a problem I also had with Watch Dogs: Legion) and I gave up trying to get it Constantly crashing after an hour Another writer on our team had a problem with a deceased NPC and to progress they had to speak to that NPC. You are now gently prevented from continuing in the game and that is with the patch from day one.

First known, the story goes to some interesting places

Many Assassin's Creed games are campaigned around family, betrayal, and political clash, and Valhalla is no different. Eivor is set in the 9th century and can be avenged at different points in history as a man or woman or as a gender at different points in history. He takes revenge for the death of his parents at the hands of a rival clan leader. In order to get what they want, they make certain decisions that ultimately lead them out of Norway with their brother Sigurd in order to found a new home in Anglo-Saxon England.

From there, the main focus of the game is for this small group of Danes to expand their reach through devastating raids or diplomatic alliances, expanding their Ravensthorpe base camp from a dilapidated village to a thriving community.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla is my personal favorite in this new remastered trilogy of games in the franchise.

The family core of the game, Eivor and her brother Sigurd, is at times strikingly similar to the dynamic of Kassandra and Alexios in Assassin's Creed Odyssey. Over time, and as the history of the Raven clan grows across England, Valhalla makes some interesting deviations that set it apart from the newer entries in the series, but I really hope the next game in the franchise breaks off this one Establishment completely.

The narrative, which is directly related to the gameplay of the Raven clan's expansion across England, is the story that I found more compelling but which can get out of whack at times. Eivor and her people are not refugees who have no choice but to flee Norway. You specifically choose to go to reap the rewards of literally greener pastures.

While they initially arrive with the goal of being as peaceful as possible, they very quickly move on to the raid and loot part. The game then creates villains who are so vicious and power hungry that you have no choice but to choose Eivor. Valhalla sometimes tries to come up with a mutually exclusive argument, but it never really works as well as intended.

I ended up taking things at face value very quickly and ultimately enjoying the narrative for what it was. It has never been lost, however, that Ubisoft is a company going through its own internal problems regarding abuse of power. So I've never entirely given up questioning the game's narrative.

The gameplay is the best the series has ever had

There's one phrase people like to use when criticizing video games: Gameplay is king. While I never fully signed this idea, it's hard to argue that in the case of Assassin's Creed Valhalla it isn't true. Something that ultimately pushed me away from Origins and Odyssey is the feeling that the battle system rebuilt was only part of the way to get there. The two year gap in the titles has allowed the development team to refine it and I am so excited with the results.

Valhalla makes some interesting changes that set it apart from the newer entries in the series.

Eivor and her clan are a devastating and relentless force that completely captures the gameplay. Every swing of my ax felt snappy and satisfying, and even after hours of playing I continued to gush out incredulous exclamations about Eivor's ruthlessness.

Most of the time, Eivor is accompanied by a group of Viking warriors to extend the range of Ravensthorpe. It works better than any system implemented in previous Assassin's Creed games. It feels like the Brotherhood should have felt.

This idea of ​​working consistently with NPC allies means there are even fewer cases this time where stealth is required. The game at certain points tries to get you to use it, but it is rarely ever needed or the more desirable tool to help you achieve your goal. While one of the big selling points has been the return of the ability to blend in with the crowd, hacking and cutting through enemies is always the more satisfying and successful solution.

The fact that stealth plays second fiddle after confrontation is an improvement, but it can be a problem for some. Fans of the series who were hoping for a return to form for stealth on a grand scale will likely be disappointed with the increased emphasis on personal combat.

All metasystems also feel more refined than previous entries. Instead of getting tons of marginally better weapons and armor, I'm more likely to find improved upgrades, reducing the need to constantly manage my inventory. Likewise, the skill tree is slowly unfolding as you branch over it, rather than presenting you with the entirety of what it has to offer from the jump. This makes the game's RPG features, which many fans have turned off in recent years, a lot easier to swallow.

A more organic and varied world

Another big problem for me regarding Origins and Odyssey was the sheer size and infinity of the game's map and activities. That's not to say the world of Valhalla isn't huge or lacking in quests, but everything feels far more manageable and achieving goals is less like ticking things off a checklist and more about natural discovery .

England, the largest map in the game, but not the only one, is a single landmass that can be traversed on foot, on horseback, or by boat through the branching rivers that run across the country. At the center is Ravensthorpe, and the game of Eivor returning to his home base often provides more context for the world that just doesn't exist in the nomadic lives that Bayek and Kasandra / Alexios led in their games.

Every swing of my ax felt snappy and satisfying, and even after hours of playing I continued to gush out incredulous exclamations about Eivor's ruthlessness.

Rather than feeling compelled to hide every marker on an island and ultimately not do so, as I did in Odyssey, Valhalla leaves your desire to strengthen the Raven clan to be your guide to traversing, and side activities, on therefore, those you bump feel far more integral.

Gone is the need to rely on your avian partner to track down an area and mark every enemy and resource you see before systematically switching from marker to marker. While you have a raven partner to look for you, it is more about getting a first lay of the land than familiarizing yourself with every nook and cranny.

Odin's Sight, a vibrant ability that highlights POIs and enemies in your immediate area, is far more useful this time around as it allows players to stay more in the immediate action and engage with them organically.

This is, of course, Assassin's Creed, which means that there are also some modern parts with our contemporary protagonist Layla. The game tries to make it more relevant by bringing in characters tied into Desmond's story in the original trilogy and spin-offs, but it feels half-hearted again, both narrative and visually. As with stealth, the modern content is something the series is forced to do, but these games would be stronger without it, and at this point I wouldn't care if they dropped it completely.

Our opinion

Assassin's Creed Valhalla promised to return to the roots of the series after two big strides by them in Origins and Odyssey, but what it tries to rekindle is holding it back and what it does best makes it decidedly very unassassin & # 39; s Creed . Those willing to hug Valhalla for what it is will find a compelling and satisfying action RPG.

Is there a better alternative?

The only other great action RPG around the launch of the Xbox Series X | S and PlayStation 5 is Watch Dogs: Legion, but Assassin's Creed Valhalla is by far the better of the two games.

How long it will take?

Ten hours or more, hundreds of hours if you're a Completor.

Should you buy it?

Yes, especially if you choose a next-generation console that increases the frame rate significantly and eliminates load times.

Editor's recommendations